Annex 1c (v4)

1

Corporate Risk Register – Quarter 2 Monitoring Report Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

CORPORATE RISKS:

HIGH RISKS

Julie Crellin

C1: Non delivery of Medium Term Financial Plan savings

There is a risk that the Medium Term Financial Plan savings required for 2013/14-2015/16 are not delivered caused by uncertainty as to the scale of savings and insufficiently robust savings plans being drawn up resulting in significant budget overspends/unsustainable drawing on reserves/severe emergency savings measures needing to be taken.

5

4

20

5

4

20

Financial Impact: RISK RATING UNCHANGED. Mitigating actions are being taken and progress has been made, however uncertainty remains as to settlement figures therefore risk remains unchanged as at the end of Q2. Council received a report in September outlining the Local Government Resource Review and the uncertainty of grant in 2013/14 and future years. A report will be submitted to Cabinet in December to propose the draft Budget for consultation. Communication regarding the Grant Settlement is delayed and is now expected after 19 December. Council will consider the Budget and Medium Term Financial Plan in February 2013. Mitigating actions include: Ongoing work with CMT & Members to identify savings required. Work with Districts and advisors to identify impact

2

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

of Local Government Resource Review. Responses to government consultations over the summer have been submitted. The Council is also working with the Society of County Treasurers and Technical Team to model consultation information emerging from Government. A detailed timetable for delivery has been developed.

Alan Ratcliffe

C2: Major contractor disputes

There is a risk that the Council's major contracts are subject to commercial disputes caused by a range of factors. Such factors include poor contractor performance, fraud or unacceptable contractor practices, weaknesses in the initial service specification or terms of contract, poor contract management, an ineffective or under resourced client role, and corporate or directorate resources having to cover the

4 4 16 4 4 16 Financial Impact:

RISK RATING UNCHANGED.

Contract management and monitoring arrangements are in place for each high value commercial contract. Risk management arrangements are in place for each contract and corporate risks identified where appropriate - see for example Waste Management (Programme Risk 3). Commercial dispute procedures are set out in all main contracts. The rating remains red due to current contractual dispute.

3

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

wide range of disparate services. This would result in significant potential claims by the Council against contractors and/or significant potential claims against the Council.

Mitigating actions include: Project management arrangements in place to review final accounts and develop Council claims. Project team includes external legal and engineering expert advisors.

Lyn Burns

C11: Inability to fund child placements. There is risk that; the existing placement budget will be insufficient to fund appropriate placements, as a result of; the increasing numbers of looked after children, resulting in; budgetary overspend

4 3 12 4 4 16 Financial and Reputational Impact: LIKELIHOOD OF THIS RISK HAS INCREASED The number of children becoming looked after continues to rise and is considerably higher than our statistical neighbours. The reasons for this are multi-faceted and complex. Additional controls have been put in place to mitigate this risk; Terms of Reference of District Placement Panels have been reviewed and decisions for a child to become looked after will be made by Senior Manager or Assistant Director. A ‘Strengthening Practice’ Programme has been commissioned for all Children’s Services social care staff and managers and will be rolled out November –May 2013. 90+ staff have attended workshops on the use of

4

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

Regulation 24 to approve connected person (friends or relative) to become foster parents. We have had no new foster carers for several months. Foster carer assessment time has all been allocated to connected persons, although many did not continue as foster carers because they became Special Guardians. In the first 6 months of this year, the number of connected persons assessments has fallen and the number of assessments of ‘stranger’ foster carers has increased. Having more connected persons will save funding and reduce the overspend.

Lyn Burns

C3: Serious failure in Children’s Services safeguarding procedures. There is a risk that there may be a serious failure in our safeguarding procedures caused by staff shortages, lack of resources, breakdown of partner relationships, policies and procedures not being clear or up

5 3 15 5 3 15 H&S (death or Injury to a child) & Reputational Impact:

RISK RATING UNCHANGED.

The Ofsted Improvement Plan has now been approved and thematic groups established to oversee the delivery of all the identified areas for development.

Practice champions have also been identified within social care.

A “Strengthening Practice” Training Programme

5

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

to date, training and supervision being ineffective or protocols not being adhered to or understood, resulting in the death of a child, investigations carried out by various authorities, e.g. criminal & Serious Case Review, impact on morale of Cumbria & partners’ staff, a possible intervention, liabilities & financial cost (potential overspends) and impact on our reputation.

has been commissioned for Children’s Services social care staff and managers and will be rolled out between November 2012 and May 2013. The Case Audit Programme has been revised to provide updates on quality and allow us to highlight good and poor practice.

A reconfiguration of staff is underway so that from 1st November Senior Management will be functional instead of District based. This will give a wider overview of County activities.

Additional posts have also been created to improve quality assurance.

A new single Triage team has been set up which will provide a single ‘front door’ across the county and will be operational by 1st November. The new team will also now provide 24 hour emergency cover. Under the new system the team will work alongside Police, Health & other partners. Partnership working is being strengthened through the daily ‘hub meeting’ where information is shared and disseminated according to case thresholds to get appropriate support for service users.

As the number of agency workers covering vacancies is higher than we would like, a new

6

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

recruitment strategy is being developed. CSD will have a stand at the forthcoming North West Compass Jobs Fair to encourage recruitment.

Draft guidance to the application of the thresholds for intervention is currently out of consultation. The aim is to ensure that there is a clear understanding on the part of other agencies about how to apply the thresholds appropriately.

MEDIUM RISKS

Julie Crellin

C10: Non delivery of budget savings 2012/13

There is a risk that the budgeted savings for 2012/13 are not delivered caused by insufficiently robust savings plans being drawn up and slippage in delivery of in year savings proposals resulting in a significant budget overspend for 2012/13 and in year emergency savings measures needing to be taken.

4 3 12 4 3 12 Financial impact

RISK RATING UNCHANGED. Q2 budget monitoring shows a reduction in overall overspend but continuing concern. Given this ongoing concern, the risk assessment has not changed for this period.

Of the planned £20.2m new savings in the 2012/13 budget, at Q2 £2.1m were forecast as not being delivered at year -end: £0.9m on cross-cutting savings and £1.2m on Directorate spending, including £0.915m in relation to P13, Waste Management Enhanced Partnership Working. The impact on the overall forecast outturn is mitigated by improved Treasury Management performance.

7

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

Directorates continue to review budgets to manage pressures.

Mitigating actions include: Budget monitoring reports are produced regularly and monitored by CMT and DMTs. Cabinet receive budget reports quarterly. CMT Programme Board has oversight of key programmes and the savings these programmes must deliver.

Directorates are continuing to work to deliver planned savings and additional underspending to offset savings not achieved.

Julia Morrison

C12: Failure to deliver Ofsted improvements There is a risk that Children’s Services fail to deliver against the required actions specified in the Ofsted Improvement Notice and reflected in the subsequent Improvement Plan. This would be caused by a significant element of the activity

4 3 12 4 3 12 Reputational and Service Delivery impact RISK RATING UNCHANGED. Progress towards delivering the Improvement Plan is overseen by an Improvement Board, which has representation from Cumbria County Council, partners and the Department for Education and is chaired by the Director of Children’s Services from Northumberland. A cross-party Member Group has been

8

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

being dependent on external partners to deliver and therefore outwith the control of Children’s Services. This could result in the outcomes for children and young people remaining inadequate, the Department for Education exercising their statutory powers of intervention and the Local Authority being required to enter into an appropriate arrangement with an external body to carry out its statutory duties.

established to provide oversight of the improvement process. In the progress report to the Board in September no activity was reported as RED. The Board is satisfied with progress and work has been continuing to ensure that the recommendations that are for immediate action are all completed by the end of September 2012. Work with partners is ensuring engagement and buy-in through their involvement in the thematic groups that are driving the improvement programme.

Richard Parry

C7: Serious failure in Adult’s Social Care safeguarding procedures. There is a risk that there may be a serious failure in our safeguarding procedures caused by staff shortages, lack of resources, breakdown of partner relationships, policies and procedures not being clear or up to date, training and supervision

5 2 10 5 2 10 H&S (death or injury to an adult) & Reputational Impact: RISK RATING UNCHANGED A multiagency independently chaired peer challenge has been undertaken. The report has yet to be finalised, however initial feedback so far has not shown any weakness in Adult Safeguarding. An Improvement plan will be prepared and implemented in due course.

9

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

being ineffective or protocols not being adhered to or understood, resulting in the death of an adult, Serious Case Review investigations carried out by various authorities, e.g. criminal, impact on Cumbria & partners’ staff, a possible intervention, liabilities & financial cost (potential overspends) and impact on our reputation.

The changes in NHS organisations are continuing and will not be complete until April 2013. The change in relationships as a result of these remains a risk. A scenario planning workshop to look at how the new organisational arrangements will work is planned for January 2013. Staffing levels continue to be monitored. The Directorate is operating at a level where capacity and demand are very closely matched and so “spare” capacity to deal with sudden increases in activity is much reduced.

Julie Crellin

C4: Internal Controls ineffective There is a risk that internal controls (including risk management arrangements) are not effective caused by weaknesses in developing, disseminating and following corporate procedures, and resource pressures resulting in Internal Audit being unable to provide reasonable assurance on the effectiveness of internal control, adverse value for money

4 2 8 4 2 8 Reputational impact: RISK RATING UNCHANGED. Progress in delivering the Governance & Internal Control Action Plan, including improved risk management reporting, enabled the Annual Governance Statement/Internal Audit Annual Report to be drawn up which provided assurance that internal controls and risk management arrangements were operating when finalising documents. The Audit Commission have provided an unqualified opinion on the Annual Accounts and Value for Money conclusion. Significant audit issues continue to be reported to

10

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

conclusion and qualification of the Council's accounts by the Audit Commission, and significant reputational damage to the Council.

CMT and the Audit and Assurance Committee, with relatively high proportions of partial/limited assurance and grade 1 recommendations. A fuller picture will be available in Q3 but at this point no change is proposed to the risk assessment. Mitigating actions include: 2011/12 Annual Governance Statement action plan has consolidated the governance and internal control improvement activity and progress will be reported to Resources DMT, CMT and the Audit & Assurance Committee.

Actions in response to Audit Commission /recommendations are being incorporated into the Annual Governance Statement action plan. Corporate Governance Group has reviewed 2011/12 arrangements for preparing the Annual Governance Statement and has developed proposals for refocusing Directorate self-assessments to emphasise areas for improvement. New protocols in place for ensuring timely

11

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

reporting of internal audit work, including setting audit scopes, preparing/clearing draft reports, and highlighting possible emerging issues.

Jamie Sims

C6: Industrial and employee relation problems Redefined risk There is a risk of trade disputes, individual challenge and employee dis-engagement, caused by the scale of modernisation and reform across the Council, resulting in significant adverse impact on service delivery and productivity.

4 2 8 4 2 8 Service Delivery & Reputational Impact: RISK RATING UNCHANGED. As the Council’s budget priorities are being decided and the workforce impacts become clearer the likelihood that this risk will occur may increase. In addition, preparatory discussions are taking place between Local Government Employers and trade unions nationally as a pre-cursor to the 2013/14 annual pay negotiations, with the unions making the threat of strike action clear at their national conferences and at the TUC. While this risk is currently unchanged if these trends continue then the risk profile may increase. Robust governance and improvements in the Councils employee relations framework including JCG consultation structure supported the achievement of savings & post reductions for 2010/11 and 2011/12 being achieved by voluntary means without service disruption. Mitigating actions include:

12

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

Continued robust governance including the overview of all workforce changes being monitored at a corporate level, and additional support and expertise being provided where required will continue to mitigate this risk. In light of the difficult economic climate, prolonged industrial action is considered unlikely. Contingency plans will be put in place to maximise service continuity in the event of limited industrial action such as a day’s stoppage.

Andrew Moss

C8: Lead local flood authority role not delivered. There is a risk that the Council will not be able to deliver the statutory role as the Lead Local Flood Authority effective caused by a lack of resources, this could result in both legal and reputational consequences for the Council.

3 2 6 3 2 6 Reputational / Legal impact RISK RATING UNCHANGED The lead local flood team is working towards the development of the Flood Risk Strategy. In 2012 two key outputs that aid the development of the strategy are - the development of the Flood Risk Map for Cumbria: on track - Surface Water Management Plan: on track and draft plan has been developed and is out for consultation with all partners of the Making Space for Water Group and Highways, County and District Planners Key mitigating actions for this risk are - Develop a Local Flood Risk Team: A five

13

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

strong team is in place. Three out of these five positions are now in place with permanent staff - including most recently the post of Flood Manager. The remaining 2 positions are being filled by temporary arrangements but work is in hand to ensure permanent arrangements are secured. - Ensure appropriate funding for carrying out the duty: DEFRA are providing £340k of funding until 2014/15. This funding must and will cover all costs associated with the role of Lead Local Flood Authority - including team costs. Future funding and income streams for the team and associated costs will need to be secured after the current DEFRA funding ceases It should be noted that certain schedules of the act are as yet not enacted and these may have further implications for resourcing both interims of the team and income and funding streams.

Jamie Sims

C9: Challenges to the new pay arrangements There is a risk of industrial and legal challenge caused by the implementation of Single Status new pay arrangements resulting in potential new liabilities

3 2 6 3 2 6 Service Delivery, Legal & Reputational Impact: RISK RATING UNCHANGED. The new pay arrangements were successfully implemented by the end of September 2011 target date. The end December 2011 deadline for unfair dismissal claims passed with no claims being registered. The Unison and GMB

14

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

registered industrial disputes following implementation, and GMB have submitted equality questionnaires. These disputes are nearing resolution. The implementation of the post-Single Status review of Teaching Assistants is now drawing to a close without incident. The Council has undertaken significant job and team re-design as part of restructures across Directorates. This has also resulted in a 43% reduction in the numbers of staff whose salary was expected to fall following the expiry of pay protection on 30 September 2012. Mitigating actions include: Clear governance and procedural arrangements are in place. The Single Status Board has noted that further progress has been made with GMB and Unison in the resolution of their trade disputes and proposals for final resolution will be considered by Cabinet on 8 November and Staffing Committee at a date to be arranged soon after that.

Ian Cartwright

C5: Ineffective mobilisation of Cumbria Fire & Rescue Service resources There is a risk that Cumbria Fire

5 2 10 5 1 5 Service Delivery & Reputational Impact: RISK RATING HAS REDUCED Cheshire handling of Cumbria Emergency calls was handed over on a permanent basis in June

15

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

& Rescue Service resources, such as fire appliances, may not be effectively mobilised to incidents due to the transition of the Cumbria Fire and Rescue Service Control Room function to Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service from June 2012 onwards. This could result in injuries or fatalities.

2012. There has been continuous monitoring of the call handling & management function and systems are in place to deal with any issues that arise. As Cheshire personnel have become more confident and au fait with the Cumbria arrangements the likelihood of any significant issues occurring has fallen and consequently the overall risk rating has reduced.

PROGRAMME RISKS:

HIGH RISKS

Richard Parry

P1: Adults Purchasing Plan – loss in continuity of care There is a risk that there could be loss of continuity of care and disruption to stability of the care market caused by unsuccessful tendering of all services as part of a regular and competitive tendering process resulting in an inability to deliver statutory care services, high levels of complaint and potential damage to the Council’s reputation.

4 4 16 4 4 16 Service Delivery & Reputational Impact RISK RATING UNCHANGED The Directorate is currently applying lessons learnt to the adults purchasing plan to inform future intelligent commissioning and procurement practices and will continue to liaise with Strategic & Corporate Procurement Unit to identify effective routes to purchase of services. The initial review report has been completed and will be shared with CMT programme board in December 2012. A group comprising legal, procurement and social care staff meets on a regular basis to

16

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

review the ongoing impact of the implementation of the new frameworks. Actions arising from this include the development, by Care Sector Alliance Cumbria, of a new recruitment and retention approach for homecare. The Contracts and Compliance Team, Safeguarding Team and Operational Teams continue work together and with partners in Care Quality Commission and NHS Cumbria and contracted Providers to promote and ensure appropriate care and support is delivered, and address issues of concern through established practices as they arise.

Alan Ratcliffe

P2: Non delivery of Connecting Cumbria

There is a risk that Cumbria County Council cannot deliver the Super Fast Broad Band project to match the expectation of the public and to the agreed schedule. This is caused by failure to secure sufficient funding or State Aid, to procure an appropriate contract, to effectively

4 4 16 4 4 16 Financial & Reputational Impact: RISK RATING UNCHANGED A report concluding the procurement process was presented to Cabinet in September with a recommendation for Award of Contract subject final resolution of terms and conditions. approval. These have been resolved and contract will therefore be signed on 29 November. Stakeholder engagement continues to be positive. The financial impact of the contract, including risk, was set out in the Cabinet report

17

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

communicate with the public, failure to manage expectations and delays as a result of legal or political challenges. This will result in damage to Cumbria County Council’s reputation and an inability to deliver the programme objectives.

on award of contract. There are three objectives – digital inclusion; economic growth; and, public sector efficiencies. This risk will transfer to Environment Directorate from Q3.

Dominic Donnini

P4: Better Places for Work – Non delivery of savings

There is a risk that the Better Places for Work programme does not achieve the £4.4m total savings target caused by changes in political & managerial decision making, insufficiently robust planning, and slippage in delivery resulting in a budget pressure / overspend.

5 3 15 5 3 15 Financial impact RISK RATING UNCHANGED. The number of applications for VR that have been agreed are sufficient to deliver the required full year saving, although as we are already part-way through the year, the full savings will not be delivered until 2013/14. The savings profile has therefore been rescheduled but this does not impact on the risk assessment for the overall delivery of the savings required from Better Places for Work. CMT will revisit the VR list to review whether there is scope to increase/enhance in-year efficiencies. There has been some slippage in delivery of property solutions in Carlisle and Kendal.

18

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

Mitigating actions include: BP4W Programme Board established to have oversight of programme, reporting to CMT Programme Board. Dedicated area delivery teams have been set up to manage the delivery of the BP4W programme within each locality. AD’s have been appointed to oversee each Locality in order to ensure appropriate leadership. Significant activity underway across Directorates planning for implementation of BP4W arrangements.

Paul Feehily

P5: Nuclear New Build Programme – Investment decisions not favouring interests of Cumbria There is a risk that the investment decisions of the nuclear sector are not made in the best interests of Cumbria caused by a lack of strategic engagement, insufficient resource capacity and expertise,

5 3 15 5 3 15 Financial and reputational impact RISK RATING UNCHANGED. The work on community benefits is long term and contributions from developers will be voluntary. There is significant work still to be done on what level of benefits can be secured and how the process will operate. Full agreement with all participants will need to be secured. The Nuclear Project Board, now subsumed into

19

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

and a slow decision making process resulting in missed opportunities to secure and protect jobs, project delays, an inadequate programme of Community Benefits and infrastructure investment and a loss in Cumbria's standing as a nuclear centre of excellence.

Environment DMT, has identified issues and opportunities associated with the delivery of the nuclear sector's programme in West Cumbria in terms of supply chain and skills. To enable the programme of works proposed at the Sellafield site over the next 5 years and to support local communities, the NDA has agreed to commit a sum of £18m into a segregated fund within the Copeland Community Fund. £15m will be available for the benefit of the communities in Copeland and the balance will be made available to facilitate the local authorities getting appropriate resources in place to respond to activities associated with the security programme, interim waste management arrangements and implementation of the oxide fuel strategy. Over the coming months, formal governance arrangements and a funding profile will be developed and brought back to the Copeland Community Fund Board for agreement.

There remains a need to understand the impacts of different development scenarios of the nuclear sector in West Cumbria and work is under way to do this through the Nuclear Project Board.

20

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

A Planning Performance Agreement is being established between NuGen, Copeland BC and Cumbria County to ensure strategic engagement with the New Build Developer and sufficient resource capacity.

MEDIUM RISKS

Dominic Donnini

P8: Non delivery of Cumbria Academies build programme There is a risk that the academies build programme is not delivered to timescale and / or budget, caused by foreseen and unforeseen issues and pressures, resulting in increased costs to the authority and delaying completion and use of the new build by the academy.

4 3 12 4 3 12 Service Delivery & Financial Impact: RISK RATING UNCHANGED. Work is currently underway at sites in the West Lakes and at Barrow. This risk will not decrease until work is completed (in Q3) as work on the demolition of vacated buildings may unearth unforeseen issues, such as asbestos, which may delay the programme. Additionally, for West Lakes Academy – we knew the site has iron ore workings beneath it, but did not know what the solution would be to mitigate against it in terms of both cost and delay. Also for Barrow Academy – we knew that a Village Green Application would be submitted but did not know how long it would take to get a decision or what the decision would be. Mitigating actions include: Children’s Services Programme Management Group oversee this programme. The Strategic

21

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

Investment & Property (SIP) unit project management team report progress against timeline and expenditure to the Programme Management Group on a monthly basis. Furness Academy on programme to be delivered for September 2013. Programme delays and increased design costs being managed by SIP.

Paul Feehily

P10: Non delivery of Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC) savings target There is a risk that the Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC) reprovision does not achieve the £1.4m savings target caused by changes in decision making following consultation, the inability to negotiate overall savings with Shanks, and the inability to realise savings early in 2012/13 resulting in a budget pressure / overspend.

3 4 12 3 4 12 Financial impact: RISK RATING UNCHANGED Cabinet decision was taken in March 2012 to redefine the approach to Household Waste Recycling Centre provision and reduce the savings target. While the revised savings target of £1.4m would lead to an impact score of 2, there are potential costs associated with contract renegotiation therefore impact remains as a 3. Mitigating actions include: 1. Negotiations remain underway with Shanks aimed at achieving the best savings possible from the agreed HWRC reprovision. These are, however, proceeding slowly with some key issues between ourselves, the contractor (Shanks) and sub-contractor (CWM) yet to resolve. 2. A wider waste service review continues in

22

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

order to identify and address other areas of possible savings and efficiencies to mitigate against the potential for not achieving the savings target.

Paul Feehily

P3: Ineffective delivery of Shanks contract There is a risk that the £700m Shanks Contract does not perform as required caused by poor contractor delivery and ineffective contract monitoring resulting in failure to deliver the statutory service to the public, potential non-compliance with statutory obligations, fines and/or prosecution, reputational damage and financial cost to the Council

5 3 15 5 2 10 Financial impact LIKELIHOOD RISK SCORE HAS REDUCED. Actions to mitigate the risks previously highlighted (notably through an internal audit report) are being implemented. A presentation was made to the Audit Committee in September detailing the actions already taken, and the Committee were satisfied that the work undertaken to date is adequately addressing the risks. Mitigating actions include: 1. Systematic, proceduralised compliance monitoring of the key, higher-risk elements of the Shanks contract (through the service compliance team) 2. Proceduralised, monthly monitoring of the contract; all meetings & contract decisions minuted and recorded 3. Improved data management systems now in place within service. 4. Further actions to be undertaken to ensure

23

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

continuous focus and improvement of Shanks contract risk management. Risk rating reduced this month to reflect actions undertaken and Internal Audit / Audit Committee involvement and feedback.

Jamie Sims

P11: Unsuccessful defence of Equal Pay Claims

There is a risk that the Council may be unsuccessful in defending itself against residual historical equal pay claims lodged by individuals, new claims since single status implementation and future equal pay claims caused by an undermining of its single status arrangements and new employment tribunal decisions, resulting in significant financial impact which would adversely affect the Council’s reserves and its ability to balance its budget.

3 3 9 3 3 9 Finance & Reputational Impact: RISK RATING UNCHANGED. Equal pay claims against the Council are categorised into 4 phases which reflect the type of jobs covered and the date the claim was registered. The equal pay litigation continues in the Tribunal system with the emphasis currently on resolving all of phase 1 and dealing with term time working and pro-rata’d pay versus full time working in phase 2. By the middle of the summer 2013 we may have the independent expert reports on the value of the jobs in this phase. The Tribunal’s focus on phase 1 and 2 provides the Council with the opportunity to deal with the outstanding settlements, to engage with schools on the phase 1 claims they are responsible for and to prepare our strategy for dealing with the remaining phase 3 and 4 claims. The Supreme Court issued a judgement against

24

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

Birmingham City Council on 24 October which opens up the prospect of staff who have left within the last 6 years having the ability to make claims as opposed to the usual 6 months time limit in the employment tribunal. The Council is assessing the position and potential liabilities. Mitigating actions include: Following engagement with lead members renewed efforts will be made with the trade unions to resolve outstanding claims. The impact of the Birmingham judgement is still being examined and an impact analysis and risk assessment for Cumbria is being undertaken.

Paul Feehily

P7: Nuclear New Build Programme – Inadequate investment to deal with Nuclear environmental Impacts There is a risk that the environmental impacts of nuclear investment decisions in Cumbria are insufficiently planned for and mitigated against caused by a lack of planning resources and professional expertise in key

4

3

12

4

2

8

Financial and reputational impact LIKELIHOOD RISK SCORE HAS REDUCED. There has been good progress on capacity issues as additional posts are in place due to external funding being secured. A revised structure for planning teams to support the nuclear programme has been implemented and the related highways structure is in development. There have been positive developments with Performance Planning Agreements and the strategic planning agreement has been agreed between the county and districts and County

25

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

environmental policy areas resulting in a failure to give adequate protection to Cumbria's world class environment, loss of amenity for local communities and a degraded visitor experience.

Council and NuGen, allowing officers to claim back the cost of their time. Work continues with stakeholders.

CLOSED PROGRAMME RISK

Alan Ratcliffe

P6: Inability to provide ICT services

There is a risk that Cumbria County Council cannot put in place appropriate arrangements for the provision of ICT services by October 2012. This will be caused by failure to either procure a satisfactory contract or to make the alternative arrangements approved by Cabinet to replace the current contract. This will result in increased budgetary pressure in order to maintain emergency measures or failure of ICT provision if a further extension

4 3 12 Risk closed. Through effective transition management, all activities required to complete the smooth transition in house of the ICT service on 1 October were achieved and therefore this risk can be closed.

Going forward the following risk has been identified:

There is a risk that ICT services provided by the in house team from October 2012 prove inadequate caused by lack of expertise/resources resulting in adverse impacts on service users and increased budgetary pressure

26

Risk owner

Corporate Risk

Description

Previous

Quarter

Impact

Previous

Quarter

Likelihood

Previous

Quarter

Risk Rating

Impact

Likelihood

Risk Rating

September 2012

Comments on mitigating actions

with the current provider proves necessary and cannot be agreed.

Paul Feehily

P13: Non delivery of savings from Waste Management Enhanced Partnership Working There is a risk that the Waste Management Enhanced Partnership Working project does not achieve the £1.15m savings target caused by lack of agreement across the Partnership and lack of progress against the project elements resulting in additional pressure on the waste service budget.

2 4 8 Risk has been realised and should be closed. We do not expect to deliver the full £1.15M savings through the Enhanced Partnership Working. We have however agreed a new recycling payment mechanism for 2012/13 and a letter has been sent to each District Council Chief Executive. This will realise £200k savings in the current financial year. With regard to the remaining savings, there has been dialogue between the County Council and the District Councils over the last couple of years aimed at identifying and agreeing areas where savings could be made. Proposals have been worked up through the Cumbria Strategic Waste Partnership, and discussed in detail with the districts who would be required to deliver these proposals. Following dialogue, it is now evident that we will not be able to achieve these. The future structure and governance of the Cumbria Strategic Waste Partnership remains under review, and we intend to continue with discussions with the Districts with a view to securing longer-term efficiencies and savings through formal, individually agreed Inter-Authority Agreements.

Red Score = 15 - 25 Amber Score = 6 - 12 Green Score = 1 – 5